Literature DB >> 10114569

Equity considerations in utility-based measures of health outcomes in economic appraisals: an adjustment algorithm.

A Gafni1, S Birch.   

Abstract

In this paper we consider whether methods currently used to measure utility of health outcomes are consistent with the equity criteria adopted by researchers. We show that unless the chosen equity criterion is incorporated in the design of the measurement instrument, the derived health state utilities are inconsistent with the equity criterion (except under special circumstances). Adjustment algorithms are derived, based on the axioms of von Neumann-Morgenstern utility theory, which take account of difference equity criteria currently adopted in the literature. The proposed approach is based on simple lottery questions of the type already used widely in empirical studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 10114569     DOI: 10.1016/0167-6296(91)90033-j

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Econ        ISSN: 0167-6296            Impact factor:   3.883


  10 in total

1.  Resource allocation within Australian indigenous communities: a program for implementing vertical equity.

Authors:  V Wiseman; S Jan
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2000

2.  Preference based outcome measures for economic evaluation of drug interventions: quality adjusted life years (QALYs) versus healthy years equivalents (HYEs).

Authors:  A Mehrez; A Gafni
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Canadian guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Canadian Collaborative Workshop for Pharmacoeconomics.

Authors:  G W Torrance; D Blaker; A Detsky; W Kennedy; F Schubert; D Menon; P Tugwell; R Konchak; E Hubbard; T Firestone
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Alternatives to the QALY measure for economic evaluations.

Authors:  A Gafni
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 5.  Is there an economic rationale for cancer drugs to have a separate reimbursement review process for resource allocation purposes?

Authors:  Heather McDonald; Cathy Charles; Laurie Elit; Amiram Gafni
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Guidelines for the adoption of new technologies: a prescription for uncontrolled growth in expenditures and how to avoid the problem.

Authors:  A Gafni; S Birch
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1993-03-15       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  The standard gamble method: what is being measured and how it is interpreted.

Authors:  A Gafni
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Incorporating Equity Concerns in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: A Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Thomas Ward; Ruben E Mujica-Mota; Anne E Spencer; Antonieta Medina-Lara
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-10-29       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Comparable worth of life for all? Conducting and disseminating health economic evaluations for refugees in Germany.

Authors:  Louise Biddle; Katharina Wahedi; Kayvan Bozorgmehr
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 10.401

10.  Recommendations for increasing the use of HIV/AIDS resource allocation models.

Authors:  Arielle Lasry; Anke Richter; Frithjof Lutscher
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 3.295

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.